Update Clang extension criteria

[AaronBallman]

This updates Clang's extension criteria to explicitly mention impacts on other projects within the monorepo.

These changes were discussed in the following RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-require-discussion-of-impact-to-monorepo-stakeholders-when-adding-new-clang-extensions/79613

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: Aaron Ballman (AaronBallman)

Changes

This updates Clang's extension criteria to explicitly mention impacts on other projects within the monorepo.

These changes were discussed in the following RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-require-discussion-of-impact-to-monorepo-stakeholders-when-adding-new-clang-extensions/79613

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96532.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) clang/www/get_involved.html (+6)

diff --git a/clang/www/get_involved.html b/clang/www/get_involved.html
index 3fc688837d0bc..99fa03abb6234 100755
--- a/clang/www/get_involved.html
+++ b/clang/www/get_involved.html
@@ -126,6 +126,12 @@ <h2 id="criteria">Contributing Extensions to Clang</h2>
   extension is not broken by ongoing maintenance in Clang. The test suite
   should be complete enough that another compiler vendor could conceivably
   validate their implementation of the feature against it.</li>
+
+  <li>A support story for other impacted projects within the monorepo: If the
+  extension can impact other parts of the project (libc++, lldb, compiler-rt,
+  etc), the proposal needs to document the impact for these projects to fully
+  support the extension and what level of support is expected. The impacted
+  project communities need to agree with that plan.</li>
 </ol>
 
 </div>